op-ed: saying “hotep” as an insult is anti-black and here’s why

In June, when I arrived at the main cemetery chapel at the Cementerio de Cristóbal Colón in Havana, Cuba, the first thing I saw was white Jesus. The picture was tacked to a bulletin board. The chapel, founded in 1876, lionized the European image with dark-tinted paintings of Catholic saints spread across the dome. That day, I looked at the picture of Jesus and didn’t believe it. Years ago, I would have glorified that picture. I would have praised Spanish colonizers with my spirituality. If I did not come into a knowledge of self, I would have hated myself enough to love the idea of the white man being God.

“Hotep” is not just a linguistic issue, but also calls into question the importance of discourse within the Black community. Instead of opening up a transformational space for discourse about opposing viewpoints, “hotep” reverts to the tactic of name-calling. Saying “hotep” doesn’t allow for productive and transformational conversations in our community. It is a bullying tactic born from anger and pain that creates an “us vs them” psychology. There is a strive for Black liberation movements to be inclusive, but how can we so easily exile and animadvert “hoteps” because we differ in opinions? What happened to actual discourse for the liberation of Black people?

The individualistic and social media activist era has left us only accountable to ourselves and our small circle while claiming to want liberation for masses of Black people. Yet, we do not wish to have healthy and productive discourse on our difference in ideologies or tactics.

For example, when Bayard Rustin, a civil rights activist and adviser to Martin Luther King, and Malcolm X debated in November of 1960, they had differing ideologies. In their debate, Malcolm X fought for the need for a Black nation state while Bayard Rustin fought for the stride towards integration. This debate did not require a creation of a term to discredit those who took different stances on the solutions to fix the social, political and economic plight of Black Americans. The debate offered an opportunity for public discourse. While name-calling may be satisfying for our individual egos, it is not beneficial for our collective understanding.

Discourse either creates a strengthening or abandonment of one’s idea. Saying “hotep” often denies discourse and welcomes confrontation. Ideologies must be accountable to the community and not solely to the individual. Discourse is a vital pathway to collective Black liberation.

For example, let’s take the paradigm of Black Consciousness developed by Anti-apartheid South African activist and writer, Stephen Biko. He wrote in his paper, “The Definition of Black Consciousness”, that “being Black is not a matter of pigmentation, being Black is a reflection of a mental attitude.” If Black people were accountable to this paradigm, we would not merely celebrate Black people for just having dark skin like ours but would celebrate people who are Black by skin AND mind. Accountability can change the function of an individual for the good of the collective. You’ve heard your skin folk ain’t always your kinfolk, right? Same idea.

Somewhere in the midst of tweets, posts and microwave revolution, we lost the discipline of being accountable to an idea much less to our elders or our community. Maybe some of us hold onto the sentiments of Pan-Africanism. But, really, who are we accountable to? To our community or just our small group of friends that reinforce our opinions? Are we really about Black liberation if when we have differing opinions with people, we delete them from our social media, side-eye them at community gatherings and call them “hoteps?” If we are accountable to developing a plan for Black freedom, we would engage in real live discourse to challenge our ideas. We would bring our facts and tactics to the table and not just our feelings.

Feelings may inspire a revolution, but cannot solely be started by them.

Damon Young, in his article “Hotep, Explained” said “Hotep logic takes this the-straight-male-is-the-center-of-the-universe way of thinking and adds a dollop of Afrocentricity to it. Ultimately, they don’t want true equality. They want to replace white male patriarchy with black male patriarchy.”

Patriarchy is often misused when discussing the definition of “hoteps.” Patriarchy means that the father is the head of the house. This does not automatically mean absolute domination over the other or the belief that one sex is inferior to the other. If people historically understand African culture based on facts and not a convenient twisting of those facts then they would practice matriarchy. What we are really talking about is chivaniusm. Chivaniusm can be defined as those who have “an attitude that the members of your own sex are always better than those of the opposite sex.”

Contextually, the meaning of hoteps:

Hoteps = Black chauvinist

Hoteps == people pursuing Black Consciousness, knowledge of self and a rites of passage. << There is nothing wrong with this and is a necessary process, yet the word “hotep” can demonize this process.

If the insult “hotep” requires the pursuit of knowledge of self to be funny than half the ancestors we quote are “hoteps.” Malcolm X was a hotep. Sojourner Truth was a hotep. Frantz Fanon was a hotep. Harriet Tubman didn’t make enslaved Africans feel comfortable talking about the Underground Railroad and freedom. By these standards, Harriet Tubman would be the highest level of hotep. Where are the jokes about them? They don’t exist because most likely, people wouldn’t consider these people “hoteps.” The term really does not apply to those seeking Black liberation, Consciousness or freedom. It applies to Black chauvinist and/or Black men that disagree with homosexuality and use African history to support their viewpoints.

The core of the Black community’s grievance is fundamental (chauvinism, gay prejudice) yet aesthetics (Afrocentricity) are used within the argument. Why can’t we attack the core of the grievance? Wouldn’t that actually address the problem? If “hoteps” are miseducated or wrongfully connecting African history to their viewpoints, why can’t we challenge or re-inform their ideas through discourse without mocking Afrocentricity?

Anti-blackness.

Black people need to pursue a fundamental understanding of self and white supremacy/capitalism. We need to remember how we were once free in order to imagine future freedom. This should never become a joke or an insult. We need to remember our history, pre-colonialism, and post-colonialism.

Well, if we can’t use hotep, what can we use? Notep? Fauxtep?

There is no reason to create an additional word. I wouldn’t use a African term or a deviation of that term. We already have a word: wack, clown, bullshit, phony, chauvinist.

Any word such as “hotep” that takes a uniquely African term to demonize a Black person is anti-blackness. It is taking a term fostered by Black people to attack Black people.

“Hotep”, a word that means peace, has been utilized for social war and division instead of discourse. The purpose of a community is to check each other and educate. Name calling does not evolve anybody. As we remember who we are, we may quote our ancestors, keep Black history documentaries on our nightstands, wear head wraps, call on Orishas or wear ankhs. This is a unique process for Black people from within the African Diaspora who are simultaneously experiencing trauma while going through the process of reclamation. We are in the process of self-love. The process of knowledge of self. The process of achieving freedom – first mentally, and then physically.

That process should always be nurtured and celebrated.

This post is in partnership with Daughters of the Diaspora.

*Fire Angelou is a spoken word artist, writer, and truth-teller from Baltimore, MD. She celebrates Blackness, uses her personal as political and ain’t got time for enablers of white supremacy. She enjoys drumming, singing, and making Black people smile. Follow her daily slaying @fireangelou, visit her blog at www.fireangelou.com, or her online magazine for Black women in the African Diaspora, www.daughtersofthediaspora.com.